Suits Against Trump Administration

Last Updated October 25, 2019

TOTAL SUITS: 62
Immigration (14 suits)

 Fighting every version of the Muslim Travel Ban at every level of the court system
o In addition to numerous amicus briefs, joined State of Washington v. Trump as a
plaintiff in Western District of Washington (3/13/17)

 Protecting the rights of Dreamers granted DACA

o Led lawsuit in Northern District of California against Administration decision to
end program (9/11/17)
o Sought preliminary injunction in Northern District of California to keep DACA
program running during trial (11/1/17)
o Preliminary injunction issued (1/9/18)
o Preliminary injunction upheld (11/8/18)
o Supreme Court granted federal government’s petition to review consolidated
DACA cases (6/28/19)
o Filed a reply brief in the Supreme Court (9/27/19)

 Fighting for resources for state and local law enforcement in so-called “sanctuary
jurisdictions” threatened by the Sessions Department of Justice (DOJ)
o In addition to leading amicus briefs in support of efforts of California cities and
counties, filed suit in Northern District of California against unlawful attempt to
place immigration enforcement conditions on certain public safety grants for law
enforcement (8/14/17)
o Preliminary injunction denied (3/6/18)
o Filed suit to compel U.S. DOJ to produce information explaining why they
imposed new conditions on these grant programs (2/7/18)
o Filed motion for summary judgment and requested nationwide injunction (7/9/18)
o Filed emergency motion to preserve funding from Project Safe Neighborhoods
grant (11/29/18)

 Submitting Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with Department of

Homeland Security (DHS) for details on confusing array of immigration
enforcement practices
o Submitted FOIA request (6/29/17)
o When DHS failed to produce required documents, filed lawsuit in Western
District of Massachusetts (10/17/17)

 Opposing the construction of an illegal border wall

o Filed suit in Southern District of California to challenge construction of border
wall projects in San Diego and Imperial Counties (9/20/17)
o Judge denied motion for summary judgment (2/27/18)
o Appealed portions of District Court decision (4/11/18)
 Defending the integrity of the 2020 Census by opposing Trump Administration’s
attempt to add question on citizenship
o Filed suit in Northern District of California hours after announcement (3/27/18)
o Judge denied Trump Administration’s motion to dismiss lawsuit (8/17/18)
o Filed brief supporting request to depose U.S. Department of Commerce Secretary
Wilbur Ross and U.S. Department of Justice acting Assistant Attorney General
John Gore (10/17/18)
o U.S. District Court Judge Richard Seeborg struck down the addition of a
citizenship question on the Census 2020 questionnaire as unlawful and
unconstitutional. (3/6/19)
o Filed motion with the U.S. Supreme Court requesting expeditious review of
California’s challenge (3/19/19).
o Filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court supporting New York and other
states in their lawsuit challenging the citizenship question (4/1/19).
o Filed a petition for certiorari asking U.S. Supreme Court to both consider and
affirm California’s district court ruling (4/5/19).
o Supreme Court blocked inclusion of the citizenship question in NY case (6/27/19)
o Trump Administration decided to abandon plan to add a citizenship question to
the 2020 census (7/2/19)
o Trump Administration announced it is reconsidering ways to add question to the
Census (7/3/19)
o Trump administration conceded that there would be no question on citizenship on
the census.
o Northern District of California issued final judgment in accordance with SCOTUS
ruling permanently barring Trump Administration from adding a citizenship
question to the 2020 census
o Filed motion to intervene as a defendant in Alabama v. U.S. Department of
Commerce to oppose Alabama’s attempt to limit the census count (8/12/19)
o Granted motion to intervene as a defendant in Alabama v. U.S. Department of
Commerce (9/6/19)

 Challenging Trump Administration’s heartless child separation policy

o Co-led, with AGs of Washington and Massachusetts, coalition of 18 AGs in filing
suit in Western District of Washington (6/26/18)
o Submitted declarations showing harm, filed motion to compel Trump
Administration to disclose information (7/2/18)

 Challenging Trump Administration’s second attempt to withhold public-safety

funds from California
o For the second year in a row, the Trump Administration placed unlawful and
unreasonable immigration conditions on a federal grant for local and state law
enforcement; in response, filed suit in Northern District of California (8/23/18)
o Judge ruled that U.S. DOJ had acted illegally and ordered the return of $28
million to California (10/8/18)
  Challenging Trump Administration’s declaration of national emergency at the
southern border and attempt to divert funding appropriated by Congress for other
purposes
o Led 16-state coalition in filing suit in Northern District of California (2/18/19)
o Four additional states - Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin -
join the AG’s coalition. (3/13/19)
o Filed a motion for preliminary injunction to safeguard taxpayer money from being
illegally diverted for construction of a border wall (4/5/19)
o Filed a reply brief in the Northern District of California (5/2/19)
o Filed a motion for partial summary judgment (6/13/19)
o District court granted in part California’s and New Mexico’s motion for partial
summary judgment. The district court also granted in part Sierra Club’s motion
for partial summary judgment and permanently enjoined the Trump
Administration from proceeding (6/28/19)
o Responded to District Court’s decision to deny Trump Administration emergency
stay and allow district order blocking construction to stay in place while
proceedings continue (7/3/19)
o Filed an appellate brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the
states’ challenge to President Trump’s unlawful diversion of funding to construct
a border wall (8/16/19)
o Filed a motion for partial summary judgment to block Trump Administration
from diverting $3.6B in military construction funds (10/12/19)

 Challenging Trump Administration’s Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds

Final Rule targeting working immigrant families who rely on safety net programs
o Led 5 Attorneys General in lawsuit challenging the rule (8/16/19)
o Filed a motion for preliminary injunction (8/27/19)
o Secured preliminary injunction blocking the rule from being implemented in the
coalition’s jurisdictions (10/11/19)

 Opposing the Trump Administration’s new rule circumventing the Flores

Settlement Agreement, governing the treatment of children in immigration custody
o Led 20 Attorneys General in lawsuit challenging the rule (8/26/19)
o Filed a motion for a preliminary injunction (8/30/19)
o A judge in a separate case involving the Flores Settlement Agreement issued a
permanent injunction against the Trump Administration’s regulations (9/27/19)

Workers’ Rights (1 suit)

 Defending In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) Medicaid program workers right to
deduct union dues
o Led suit against HHS in Northern District of California for rule that creates
barriers for states to deduct employee benefits and union dues from workers’
paychecks (5/13/19)

Civil Rights (1 suit)

 Standing up for transgender servicemembers harmed by Trump’s ban
 o In addition to filing amicus briefs on several cases challenging this ban, filed
motion to intervene in Stockman v. Trump in Central District of California
(11/9/17)
o Motion to intervene granted (11/16/17)
o Preliminary injunction obtained (12/22/17)
o Supreme Court lifted preliminary injunction (1/22/19)

Health Care (8 suits)

 Standing up for access to affordable birth control
o Led suit against Trump Administration in Northern District of California for rules
that take away access to birth control (10/6/17), joined by Delaware, Maryland,
New York, and Virginia (11/1/17)
o Led multistate petition for nationwide injunction in Northern District of
California to halt those rules (11/9/17)
o Preliminary injunction granted (12/21/17)
o Filed brief defending preliminary injunction (5/21/18)
o Preliminary injunction upheld (12/13/18)
o Filed motion for preliminary injunction to block final rules (12/20/18)
o Preliminary injunction granted (1/13/19)
o Filed reply brief (4/15/19)
o 9th Circuit affirmed the district court’s preliminary injunction (10/22/19)

 Intervening in existing federal lawsuit to defend Affordable Care Act

o Led coalition of 19 state attorneys general in filing motion to intervene in D.C.
Circuit in House v. Price, now House v. Hargan, lawsuit filed by House
Republicans that undercuts affordability of health-insurance plans under the
Affordable Care Act (5/18/17)
o Motion to intervene granted (8/1/17), case being held in abeyance

 Compelling the Trump Administration to make cost-sharing reduction payments

required by Affordable Care Act
o Led coalition of states in suing Trump Administration for abrupt decision to stop
making payments (California v. Trump) (10/13/17)
o Sought emergency injunction (5/18/17), which was denied; states will move for a
motion of summary judgment
o Granted motion to dismiss without prejudice, clearing the way for future lawsuits
(7/18/18)

 Protecting the Affordable Care Act from a challenge from Texas and other states
o Filed motion to intervene in Northern District of Texas in Texas et al. v. United
States et al., case that imperils health coverage and funding for all Americans
(4/9/18)
o Motion to intervene granted (5/16/18)
o Led coalition of 16 AGs in filing motion to oppose Texas’s application for
preliminary injunction that would halt operation of the ACA nationwide (6/8/18)
o ACA declared unconstitutional but injunction denied (12/14/18)
 o Filed expedited motion to prevent disruption to Americans’ healthcare (12/17/18)
o Stay issued to ensure ACA is implemented during litigation (12/30/18)
o Filed notice of appeal, moving defense of the ACA to the Fifth Circuit Court of
Appeals (1/3/19)
o Filed opening brief defending the ACA in Fifth Circuit Court of appeals (3/25/19)
o Led coalition of 21 AGs in filing a response challenging plaintiffs’ standing
(5/22/19)
o Oral arguments held (7/9/19)

 Opposing expansion of Association Health Plans that offer junk health-insurance

coverage that evades ACA coverage requirements and consumer protections
o Filed suit in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (7/26/18)
o Filed for expedited judgment in case (8/23/18)

 Protecting Title X Family Planning Program

o Filed suit in Northern District of California (3/4/19)
o Filed a motion for preliminary injunction in district court (3/22/19)
o Preliminary injunction was granted, halting the rule in California (4/26/19)
o Ninth Circuit stayed the preliminary injunction (6/20/19)
o Petitioned Ninth Circuit to grant en banc reconsideration of stay (6/26/19)
o Filed answering brief petitioning court to affirm district court’s PI (7/1/19)
o Ninth Circuit granted en banc reconsideration (7/3/19)

 Defending school meal nutrition standards and the health of students around the
country
o Filed suit as part of a coalition challenging the Trump Administration USDA’s
reversal of school meal standards without analysis of the relevant science and
existing federal dietary guidelines (4/3/19).

 Opposing rule that allows refusal of health care on religious or moral objections.
o Filed suit in Northern District of California (5/21/19)
o Filed a motion for preliminary injunction in district court (6/4/19)
o Trump administration requested six-month delay in implementation (7/1/19)
o Filed a motion for summary judgment (9/12/19)

Education (3 suits)
 Defending Borrower Defense Rule, which improves loan forgiveness process for
students defrauded by their schools
o Filed motion to intervene in D.C. District Court to defend Borrower Defense Rule
(6/14/17)
o D.C. District Court ruled that delay was unlawful (9/12/18)
o D.C. District Court ordered rule into effect (10/16/18)

 Defending Gainful Employment Rule, an Obama-era protection that requires for-

profit schools to prepare students for “gainful employment in a recognized
occupation”
 o Filed lawsuit in D.C. District Court (10/17/17)

 Challenging Department of Education’s failure to process debt-relief claims

submitted by students who took our federal loans to attend for-profit colleges
including Corinthian
o Filed lawsuit in Northern District of California (12/14/17)
o District Court refused to dismiss California’s lawsuit (3/4/19)

Consumer Protection (4 suits)

 Defending internet freedom
o Filed suit against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), challenging
its attempt to repeal net neutrality rules (1/16/18)
o Court vacated the FCC's Preemption Directive, which would have barred states
from imposing their own net neutrality requirements (10/1/19)

 Challenging Arbitrary “Two for One” Executive Order

o Filed suit with Oregon and Minnesota against President Trump challenging his
executive order that requires agencies to arbitrarily repeal two regulations for
every one regulation adopted (4/4/19)

 Protecting Consumers from asbestos

o Filed suit, co-leading coalition of 11 attorneys general, challenging the EPA’s
failure to initiate rulemaking to regulate asbestos (7/1/19)

 Protecting investors from brokers not working in their best interest

o Filed suit in a coalition of eight attorneys general challenging the Security and
Exchange Commission’s (SEC) new rule allowing broker-dealers to continue
providing conflicted advice to investors. (9/10/19)

Preventing Gun Violence (1 suit)

 Blocking Trump Administration decision to allow downloadable and untraceable
(so-called “ghost”) guns to become available without restriction
o Filed suit against U.S. Department of State in Western District of Washington
(8/2/18)
o Filed for preliminary injunction (8/10/18)
o Secured preliminary injunction (8/27/18)

Climate (30 suits)

 Submitting FOIA request to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for
documents related to known conflicts of interest of EPA Administrator Pruitt
o Submitted FOIA request (4/7/17)
o Filed suit against EPA when it failed to produce required documents (8/11/17)
o EPA produced documents (5/9/18)

 Fighting to preserve Waste Prevention Rule, which protects against release of

methane from oil and gas operations on public and tribal lands
 o Led lawsuit in Northern District of California against Department of the Interior
(DOI) for illegal delay of Rule (7/5/17)
o Court ruled that delay was illegal (10/4/17)
o When Trump Administration suspended Rule, filed lawsuit in Northern
District of California (12/19/17)
o Judge sided with California and issued nationwide injunction, ordering Rule go
into effect immediately (2/23/18)
o The Tenth Circuit issued an order vacating Judge Skavdahl’s April 2018 order
staying the key requirements of BLM’s waste prevention rule. (4/9/19)
o When Trump Administration repealed Rule, filed lawsuit in Northern
District of California (9/18/18)
o Filed a reply brief (10/2/19)

 Holding Department of Energy (DOE) accountable for failure to publish finalized

energy standards for five products (portable air conditioners, uninterruptible power
supplies, air compressors, walk-in coolers and freezers and commercial packaged
boilers)
o Led suit in Northern District of California (6/13/17)
o DOE let standards for walk-in coolers and freezers to go into effect and continues
to fight four other rules in court (9/30/17);
o Federal court ruled in favor of CA DOJ, finding that DOE violated its own
regulations and that the standards must go into effect (2/15/18)
o DOE appealed the decision and the court’s order was halted pending a ruling by
the Ninth Circuit.
o Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the order by the district court (10/10/19)

 Opposing Department of the Interior (DOI) decision to restart federal coal leasing
on public land
o Filed suit in District of Montana that challenged decision to restart coal leasing
while cutting short an ongoing environmental review of the program (5/10/17)
o Received a partial summary judgement in favor of the states, finding that DOI
must comply with NEPA (4/19/19).

 Making sure taxpayers receive royalties from companies that extract oil, gas, coal
(Valuation Rule)
o Along with New Mexico AG, filed suit in Northern District of California for
illegal delay of Valuation Rule (4/27/17)
o Magistrate Judge invalidated DOI’s delay of the effective date (8/30/17)
o In response to DOI finalizing the repeal of the Rule, California and New
Mexico filed suit in the Northern District of California (10/17/17)
o A district court struck down the Trump Administration’s unlawful repeal of the
Valuation rule (4/12/19)
o Court heard argument on petitioners’ motion for a preliminary injunction. (9/4/19)
o The Court granted the preliminary injunction only as to the valuation of coal
(approx. $1.06M), leaving the Rule intact as to oil and natural gas royalties
(approx. $84M).
 o Along with New Mexico AG, filed motion to intervene in Cloud Peak v. DOI, a
case attempting to overturn DOI’s Valuation Rule.

 Opposing National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) delay of

increased penalties for automakers whose vehicles fail to comply with fuel-efficiency
standards
o Led lawsuit in Second Circuit challenging this delay (9/11/17)
o Secured ruling requiring Administration to immediately implement rule (4/24/18)

 Opposing Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) decision to delay Greenhouse

Gas Performance Measure, which requires state and local officials to measure
greenhouse gas emissions on highways
o Led coalition of six AGs and the California Air Resources Board in suing FHWA
in Northern District of California (9/20/17)
o Trump Administration reversed course and announced they would immediately
implement Measure (9/28/17)

 Standing up for energy-efficiency standard for ceiling fans illegally delayed by DOE
o Filed suit in Second Circuit challenging delays (3/31/17)
o DOE reversed course and let standard go into effect (9/30/17)

 Pushing back against EPA one-year unlawful delay of ozone attainment standards
o Filed suit in D.C. Circuit (8/1/17)
o EPA reversed course and let the standard go into effect (8/3/17)
o However, EPA has failed to fulfill its duty to designate all areas of the country as
either “attainment” or “non-attainment,” so AG Becerra led lawsuit in Northern
District of California seeking order to compel EPA to fulfill its duty
(12/5/17)
o Secured federal court ruling to require EPA to designate areas of the country that
have unhealthy levels of smog (3/12/18)

 Challenging Bureau of Land Management’s repeal of regulations governing

hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, of oil and gas wells drilled on federal and Native
American tribal lands
o Filed suit in Northern District of California (1/24/18)
o Filed a motion for summary judgment (6/3/19)

 Standing up for the 2015 Clean Water Rule, which protects California’s lakes,
rivers, and steams from pollutants
o Filed suit in Southern District of New York (2/6/18)
o In parallel challenges to the suspension, two separate district courts (South
Carolina 8/2018, Washington 11/2018) ruled the suspension unlawful and issued
a nationwide injunction. The federal government appealed the rulings, but then
withdrew its appeals in early March 2019, leaving the injunction in place. We
then voluntarily dismissed our lawsuit. (3/19/19)
 Holding EPA accountable for failure to reduce methane emissions from existing oil
and natural gas operations, as required under federal law
o Filed suit in District Court for the District of Columbia (4/5/18)

 Holding EPA accountable for failure to make required safety finding for
chlorpyrifos, a pesticide used on more than 80 food crops, which has been suspected
of causing health problems for infants and children
o Submitted legal objections to EPA (6/6/17)
o Secured motion to intervene in a federal lawsuit (League of United Latin
American Citizens, et al. v. Pruitt) (6/6/18)
o Federal judge ordered EPA to ban chlorpyrifos from sale in the United States
within 60 days (8/9/18)

 Holding EPA accountable for letting polluters off the hook by repealing
longstanding “Once In, Always In” policy that requires major sources of hazardous
air pollutants to permanently take action to reduce their emissions
o Filed suit in District of Columbia Court of Appeals (4/10/18)

 Defending the nation’s single vehicle emission standard

o Led coalition of 17 states and the District of Columbia in suing EPA to preserve
nations single vehicle emission standard (5/2/18)

 Protecting agricultural workers from harmful pesticides

o Sued EPA for suspension of Worker Protection Standard, which requires safety
training for agricultural workers and families (5/30/18)
o EPA backed down and announced it would implement the standards (6/14/18)

 Holding EPA accountable for failure to enforce a critical landfill methane

regulation
o Sued EPA for failing to implement or enforce 2016 Emission Guidelines and
Compliance Times for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills (5/31/18)
o Federal district court ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA)
failure to implement and enforce was unlawful. (5/6/19)

 Preventing usage of potent greenhouse gas

o Sued EPA for illegal decision to allow companies to incorporate
hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) in their products (6/27/18)

 Protecting rule that limits production of super-polluting freight truck diesel engines
o Sued EPA for delay of 2016 Glider Rule (7/19/18)
o EPA reversed course and withdrew directive not to enforce Glider Rule (7/27/18)

 Standing up for wildlife and ecosystems protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
 o Sued DOI for rollback of 100-year old Migratory Bird Treaty Act, which protects
more than 1,000 native U.S. species of birds, including the American bald eagle
(9/5/18)
o District court denied DOI’s attempt to have case thrown out (8/2/19)

 Defending penalties for industry violations of CAFE Standards

o Sued NHSTA for a final rule that reduces necessary penalties for automakers that
fail to meet CAFE standards far below inflation-adjusted penalty required by law.
(8/2/19)

 Challenging the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) refusal to make a

required safety finding for the dangerous pesticide chlorpyrifos.
o Sued EPA as part of multistate coalition (8/7/19)

 Challenged the EPA’s repeal of the Clean Power Plan and its replacement the
Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) Rule
o Sued EPA as part of multistate coalition (8/13/19)
o Filed a petition to intervene in three lawsuits filed by coal companies challenging
the EPA’s authority to regulate power plants’ greenhouse gas emissions. (10/8/19)

 Challenged NHTSA’s regulation designed to preempt California’s greenhouse gas

emissions and Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV) standards
o Sued NHTSA with Governor Newsom, the CA Air Resources Board, and a
multistate coalition (9/20/19)

 Challenged the EPA’s determination that 1,365 acres of salt ponds in Redwood City
are not “waters of the United States” under the Clean Water Act.
o Sued EPA over its decision, made at the request of developers, which would
allow this area to be built upon without the protections afforded by the Clean
Water Act (9/24/19)

 Challenged the Trump Administration’s rollback of the Endangered Species Act.

o Sued Interior, Commerce, Fish and Wildlife Service, and National Marine
Fisheries Serivce over decision to finalize three rules that undermine the key
requirements and purpose of the Endangered Species Act (9/25/19)